2026 McLaren Mastercard F1 Team

[venkyhere]

A lot of discussion about gear ratios and how for some this means that McLaren has a drag problem because of choosing relative lower ratios compared to the competition and how this handicaps them in terms of top speed… Can anyone share the data showing that McLaren’s top speed is gear ratio limited? What are the assumptions to based that on?

Traditionally, until the previous regs, no one would design their car to have top speed to be rpm limited, it has always been drag limited.
For this set of regulations, there are two schools of thought :

a) there isn't enough battery anyway to actually hit the drag defined top speed limit, so might as well choose shorter ratios and maximize acceleration, and use more deployment than others in non-straights, since McLaren have traditionally sacrificed top speed for downforce and always have more drag than others.

b) McL40 is believed to have lower drag than competition, so might as well choose smaller ratios to help accelerate quicker in straights, utilising lower drag , and dedicate a lot more deployment than others to make it a double whammy in the straights. The shorter ratios will allow faster recharge in the corners anyway, without losing laptime,since traction limits wont allow mega deployment at corner exits.

Many of our members align with (a) , myself align with (b). Only time will tell who guessed right.

[mwillems]

There are no assumptions, it's highlighted only that the ratios coupled with data so far may indicate Mclaren continuing to have less top speed than others with the suspicion the we may carry more drag or may not be as confident in energy management. A quick read will also show that this was highlighted as possibly just because the Merc engine is not being pushed, that the Mclaren seems to hit the higher top speeds of the Merc teams, that the gears may not yet be homlogated and of course, it's just testing.

It will also highlight that Merc have suggested that harvesting like Max has done would be detrimental to Merc engine life.

But personally I won't be surprised if we end up not having the speed of other cars as the way the Mclaren has been designed over the past few years, this has been a consistent trait and drag vs energy may be a determining factor of this season.

There is a chart of a previous page with relative differences in ratios this year, between teams.

[Farnborough]

To put another consideration in the equation, if running flat out and in this case above PU ICE torque peak (seems to be at 11,500 ish) say at close to 13,000rpm, then as E diminishes while at highest drag speed, then it'll pull the rpm back down but still approaching that peak torque position. The PU more likely to hold onto pace with this approach.

In comparison, a longer 8th ratio could be at peak torque point for same circumstances, then dropping below and away from peak torque, necessitating a change down in ratio (spoken about in strategic terms, changing down at full speed) to give greater compromise.

With the first example, it could just about eek it out in getting to the braking point more effectively and without interruption.

Its similar to classically going up hill in a road vehicle at below torque point in highest ratio, you'll be forced to drop down a ratio to maintain speed.

[mwillems]

To put another consideration in the equation, if running flat out and in this case above PU ICE torque peak (seems to be at 11,500 ish) say at close to 13,000rpm, then as E diminishes while at highest drag speed, then it'll pull the rpm back down but still approaching that peak torque position. The PU more likely to hold onto pace with this approach.

In comparison, a longer 8th ratio could be at peak torque point for same circumstances, then dropping below and away from peak torque, necessitating a change down in ratio (spoken about in strategic terms, changing down at full speed) to give greater compromise.

With the first example, it could just about eek it out in getting to the braking point more effectively and without interruption.

Its similar to classically going up hill in a road vehicle at below torque point in highest ratio, you'll be forced to drop down a ratio to maintain speed.

Not disputing, but why does torque matter so much more than peak power at high speed? Will energy slowly drop off or will it be timed to either finish earlier in the straight, be used less in the middle or start of the straight, or just be graduated more for the whole of the straight?

I don't think we can trust any mappings we have seen in testing as teams wouldn't give those away right now.

The conversation over the past few pages has been more discussing potential characteristics and risk, and I suppose the risk associated with the shorter gears is that if someone can harvest a little more energy and have gearing for 10kph more, it is pretty devastating in that they can defend and they can overtake more in the race, subject to energy usage over the race. it is also likely faster in a Q run where teams carry that extra 4MJ Electrical energy. Would they hold that position over the race? Remains to be seen.

It's also likely that all teams would have considered this. So once again it is more a question of wether Mclaren have simply done their sums better or if others just can do more on the straights.

[Farnborough]

To put another consideration in the equation, if running flat out and in this case above PU ICE torque peak (seems to be at 11,500 ish) say at close to 13,000rpm, then as E diminishes while at highest drag speed, then it'll pull the rpm back down but still approaching that peak torque position. The PU more likely to hold onto pace with this approach.

In comparison, a longer 8th ratio could be at peak torque point for same circumstances, then dropping below and away from peak torque, necessitating a change down in ratio (spoken about in strategic terms, changing down at full speed) to give greater compromise.

With the first example, it could just about eek it out in getting to the braking point more effectively and without interruption.

Its similar to classically going up hill in a road vehicle at below torque point in highest ratio, you'll be forced to drop down a ratio to maintain speed.

Not disputing, but why does torque matter so much more than peak power? Will energy slowly drop off or will it be timed to either finish earlier in the straight, be used less in the middle or start of the straight, or just be graduated more for the whole of the straight?

I don't think we can trust any mappings we have seen in testing as teams wouldn't give those away right now.

The conversation over the past few pages has been more discussing risk, and I suppose the risk associated with the shorter gears is that if someone can harvest a little more energy and have gearing for 10kph more, it is pretty devastating in that they can defend and they can overtake more in the race, subject to energy usage over the race. it is also likely faster in a Q run where teams carry that extra 4MJ Electrical energy. Would they hold that position over the race? Remains to be seen.

Torque is the leverage a PU can make. Power expressed as bhp involves a calculation with time component, the minute in "rpm" to give a work effort, of that torque over time. If the same torque peak occurs at 5,000rpm in one pu, and 10,000rpm in another the bhp will be higher in the 10,000rpm because the same torque is now applied twice as many times. The gear ratio can now be utilised to "fit" that number of occurance within a set distance.
Playing with that ratio has different effects against the load now applied.

Go too far below the true torque peak, then the PU will have trouble pulling its own socks up then needing a lower ratio to put it back near its torque optimum.

[mwillems]

How much electrical energy would be required to maintain top speed, do you think?

Im just thinking that at those speeds you'll still see a reduction even if you lose 30pc of what you were deploying, so it is more a case of mitigation not resolution.

It'll be interesting to see these units used in anger.

None the less, I can't imagine other teams havent considered it and that the only real indicator is that with shorter gearing, theoretical top speed is lower. The reason as to why this is set up has led to some interesting conversation, at least for me

[Darth-Piekus]

So what do you think so far from Day 1 of Test 3?

[FittingMechanics]

So what do you think so far from Day 1 of Test 3?

Lando once again looks good. He did a good lap on C2, now seems to be on test tires and was close to LEC even though he didn't do a best S3 where he usually gains on everyone.

My feeling that the car has pace continues.

[organic]

Horrendous stint for Norris on protos

[Ground Effect]

Horrendous stint for Norris on protos

How many laps on them?

[Darth-Piekus]

10 Laps but how was it for other cars that used these tyres?

[McFAN]

Horrendous stint for Norris on protos

How many laps on them?

[McFAN]

The pace gap between single lap and long running seems implausibly large to me

[organic]

Now a c2 run. Inconsistent laptimes. Car behaviour unstable?

[Def]

Now a c2 run. Inconsistent laptimes. Car behaviour unstable?

Horrendous stint for Norris on protos

He started both times on worn-out tires.